← Return to 3 month follow up: What was your PSA at 3 and 6 months?

Discussion

3 month follow up: What was your PSA at 3 and 6 months?

Prostate Cancer | Last Active: Jan 15 8:17am | Replies (44)
Comment receiving replies
@retireditguy

I had NS RARP in 06/2024. At 3 months it was .04 while at 6 months (which was last week) it came back as < .1 Both were done at the same lab, but the psa reports identified that that they were done on different types of machine. The .04 was the bottom of the scale for that machine, while < .1 was the bottom of the scale for the 2nd machine. So as near as I could determine, I believe both my readings translate into some version of "too low to detect". But I'm no medical professional and this is what I gleaned from reading, so I could be wrong. BTW, to see the machine I had to go into the lab portal and choose a different report viewing option as the standard view didn't show the machine used to perform the test. I have no idea if other labs offer similar information. I used Quest lab. Best wishes.

Jump to this post

Replies to "I had NS RARP in 06/2024. At 3 months it was .04 while at 6 months..."
jc76 | @jc76 | Jan 10 6:34am

@retireditguy
I too an not a medical professional. The information was really informative. Surely explains why I was told would not get a number below .1 as considered undetecable at Mayo Jacksonville lab and my PCP.

You mentioned other labs and what they can offer in numbers and diferenct type lab machines. That sure helped me understand the differences in what I was reading for post of all those readgins below .1

Per my Mayo PCP Mayo lab uses the .1 as lowest number you will get because their lab indicate anything below that would be considered undetectable.

VIEW AND REPLY
manutebol | @manutebol | Jan 14 12:54pm

Assuming you have had no other therapies besides surgery….If it were me, I’d definitely want to be checked again with the lower threshold assay. If you were indeed 0.04 on the first test, without a less than sign, it makes no sense why they would’ve tested you with the higher threshold cutoff of < 0.1 on that next test. You could be a 0.099 now, which would raise a lot of alarms in terms of pushing for further treatment now. I personally would go get another more sensitive test again rather than waiting around, especially if I had a high Gleason or other high risk features, but that’s just me.

VIEW AND REPLY